Patna High CourtCR. MISC./49294/2014dismissed

Md. Subhan @ Subhan v. The State Of Bihar

2015-03-03Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.49294 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -14 Year- 2013 Thana -FORBESGANJ District- ARRARIA ====================================================== Md. Subhan @ Subhan, s/o Md. Khatru resident of village Tapputola, Pipraghat, P.S. Jogbani District Araria .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rita Verma (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-03-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P.

The petitioner, who is in custody in connection with Forbesganj P.S. Case No. 14 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. No. 119 of 2013 registered for the offence under Section 395, 397 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, has prayed for grant of bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused the petitioner has been implicated in the present case. It has further been argued that Police is instrumental in implicating the petitioner in the present case. He submits that almost on similar accusation some of the accused have been granted bail by this court including the accused on whose confession petitioner was

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.49294 of 2014 (2) dt.03-03-2015 2/2 made accused.

From record it is evident that petitioner is accused in cases relating to dacoity and robbery in about 15 cases which has been mentioned in paragraph no. 2 of the petition. Keeping in view the antecedent of the petitioner, I do not find any ground to extend the privilege of bail to the petitioner. The petition stands dismissed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that direction may be given for concluding the trial. Such prayer is rejected.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) Praful/- U T